Tiller wrote:
Street connections are unfortunately a loaded topic, as certain business interests are concerned they will bring in the wrong people (which is super racist).

To be fair, I don't think it has so much to do with race as it does with not wanting people to loiter, vandalize, or defecate in the skyway. There is some precedence for concern due to the anti-social behaviors that have been occurring in the skyway near the street connection to the St Paul Skyway: http://www.twincities.com/2017/01/27/me ... ppy-crowd/

I can't claim to know the best way to solve the problem. But let's not accuse a nameless group of alleged people you don't know of being racist -- unless you have actual evidence of racism.

Nope, they're racists and I see no treason to be worried about their feelings.

To be fair, I don't think it has so much to do with race as it does with not wanting people to loiter, vandalize, or defecate in the skyway. There is some precedence for concern due to the anti-social behaviors that have been occurring in the skyway near the street connection to the St Paul Skyway: http://www.twincities.com/2017/01/27/me ... ppy-crowd/

I can't claim to know the best way to solve the problem. But let's not accuse a nameless group of alleged people you don't know of being racist -- unless you have actual evidence of racism.

Nope, they're racists and I see no treason to be worried about their feelings.

Deplorables, all of them.

To be completely serious I've seen homeless people fighting each other over sections of the Skyway to sleep in. This isn't a racial observation it's an observation of mental illness and drug addiction. If I didn't have a roof over my head they Skyway would be a pretty enticing place on a cold night.

As a city we need to do something to keep people from freezing to death on cold nights.

To be fair, I don't think it has so much to do with race as it does with not wanting people to loiter, vandalize, or defecate in the skyway. There is some precedence for concern due to the anti-social behaviors that have been occurring in the skyway near the street connection to the St Paul Skyway: http://www.twincities.com/2017/01/27/me ... ppy-crowd/

I can't claim to know the best way to solve the problem. But let's not accuse a nameless group of alleged people you don't know of being racist -- unless you have actual evidence of racism.

Maybe there is a big problem with vandalism and feces in the skyways, although I think building owners are the ones in the best position to deal with that anyway. But if the problem is loitering, there's simply no way that you can plausibly separate that crime from race in America. It's well-documented that those arrested for loitering are far disproportionately black or Latino, even controlling for poverty or homelessness, and the vagueness of the crime almost guarantees that its use is arbitrary. I'm sure most people here are familiar with the case of Chris Lollie, who was sitting in an area of comfortable chairs in the skyway of the First National Bank building. Those chairs were adjacent to the public right-of-way and clearly meant for public use; the building would even advertise on social media encouraging people to use them. But because Lollie was black, he was accused of loitering, tasered, and arrested. (These chairs, and this story, were brought up on Bill Lindeke's skyway tour a couple weeks ago--highly recommend all those tours).

Granted, not every case is going to be as sympathetic as Lollie's. Without a doubt, there are people who are mentally ill, or committing other crimes, or any number of other things. But I bet the Lollie's of the world are more numerous than anyone wants to admit. A lot of people "loitering" are only committing the crime of making (predominantly white) people uncomfortable.

I understand your hesitation at suggesting that this issue has a racial element; no-one likes to have their non-racist bona fides challenged. But as Jamelle Bouie likes to point out, there is in fact something worse than being called a racist: racist actions against you. And I really think it's worth asking whether we would be having a discussion about the problem of "loitering" in the skyways if the people in question were mostly white men in professional clothing.

So what? Did anyone say that the skyways are crime-free? That's why we have security guards and police. There's a big, big leap from "we need to deal with crime" to the sort of mentality that caused the incident with Chris Lollie.

So I hear all of you on racism. It's a serious issue facing a lot of urban planning subjects. However, any person who lives in the metro, maybe the state, and has been to Minneapolis before knows there are skyways... creating more accessible entrances isn't going to make it any more known to homeless people or local people of any race. Isn't the point of creating street level skyway access to activate the street and make access better for people who are from out of town etc etc?

So what? Did anyone say that the skyways are crime-free? That's why we have security guards and police. There's a big, big leap from "we need to deal with crime" to the sort of mentality that caused the incident with Chris Lollie.

Umm, I think that's precisely the point the posters above are trying to make: it's a big, big, leap. You can be both opposed to the treatment of Chris Lollie, and opposed to behavior that makes the skyway (or anywhere) less appealing. Leaping to the racism accusation does not necessarily help.

1) amiller92 said: "Street connections are unfortunately a loaded topic, as certain business interests are concerned they will bring in the wrong people (which is super racist)."

2) You responded that you "don't think it has so much to do with race as it does with not wanting people to loiter, vandalize, or defecate in the skyway."

3) I respond that vandalism and defecation are real problems to the extent that they occur, but that solving them doesn't require closing off access, and that "loitering" is a crime whose racial implications are well-documented.

4) You completely redirect the conversation, asking if it's "racist when someone wants to air their concerns after seeing incidents like [a fight between minors] play out in the skyway?"

Notice that I never said there wasn't crime in the skyways, or that there aren't things that should be done. But by your own unprompted admission one of the biggest problems in the skyways is loitering, which is a "problem" that simply cannot be separated from race and racial bias in this country.

Racism isn't a black-or-white thing. Your motives don't have to be exclusively based on race to be racist. Building owners can have legitimate concerns and still also have racist concerns, or advocate for essentially racist "solutions." Until we're willing to acknowledge both sides (and I've been freely willing to admit that there *are* problems) we're never going to solve either.

1) amiller92 said: "Street connections are unfortunately a loaded topic, as certain business interests are concerned they will bring in the wrong people (which is super racist)."

2) You responded that you "don't think it has so much to do with race as it does with not wanting people to loiter, vandalize, or defecate in the skyway."

3) I respond that vandalism and defecation are real problems to the extent that they occur, but that solving them doesn't require closing off access, and that "loitering" is a crime whose racial implications are well-documented.

4) You completely redirect the conversation, asking if it's "racist when someone wants to air their concerns after seeing incidents like [a fight between minors] play out in the skyway?"

Notice that I never said there wasn't crime in the skyways, or that there aren't things that should be done. But by your own unprompted admission one of the biggest problems in the skyways is loitering, which is a "problem" that simply cannot be separated from race and racial bias in this country.

Racism isn't a black-or-white thing. Your motives don't have to be exclusively based on race to be racist. Building owners can have legitimate concerns and still also have racist concerns, or advocate for essentially racist "solutions." Until we're willing to acknowledge both sides (and I've been freely willing to admit that there *are* problems) we're never going to solve either.

In English grammar and in particular in casual English, generic you, impersonal you or indefinite you is the pronoun you in its use in referring to an unspecified person, as opposed to its use as the second person pronoun.

Not saying that you (in particular) are a racist.

edit: Wait, I didn't realize that you (kirby) aren't the one who made the post mentioning loitering (at40man). Sorry about that! This bug where quotes don't have names really needs to get fixed.

kirby96 wrote:Umm, I think that's precisely the point the posters above are trying to make: it's a big, big, leap. You can be both opposed to the treatment of Chris Lollie, and opposed to behavior that makes the skyway (or anywhere) less appealing. Leaping to the racism accusation does not necessarily help.

kirby96 wrote:Umm, I think that's precisely the point the posters above are trying to make: it's a big, big, leap. You can be both opposed to the treatment of Chris Lollie, and opposed to behavior that makes the skyway (or anywhere) less appealing. Leaping to the racism accusation does not necessarily help.

Exactly.

We are never going to make any progress on our racial issues if white people keep insisting that it's "not helpful" to point out racism. Or worse, view being called on the racist baggage that each and every one of us has as more offensive than the actual racism.

We are never going to make any progress on our racial issues if white people keep insisting that it's "not helpful" to point out racism. Or worse, view being called on the racist baggage that each and every one of us has as more offensive than the actual racism.

"Statistics on reported crimes from Jan. 1 to Feb. 11, however, show that the number of offenses downtown has increased compared to the same time a year ago — 163 compared with 132. Over the first six weeks of this year, there have been eight more robberies and 13 more narcotics offenses than over the same period last year. The number of assaults and thefts are about the same as a year ago."

Crime may be increasing, which makes people concerned (I say "may" because more data is probably needed to establish a trend). Just because things aren't 80s-90s bad (thanks leaded gasoline ban) doesn't mean things can't/aren't moving in that direction due to other factors (before you ask, I'm not commenting on what they may be).

Setting that aside, we do need to more thoroughly connect the sidewalks and skyways (and improve wayfinding).

Great strawman, but again, has anyone here said that downtown Saint Paul is problem-free?

The strawman was crying "racism" in regards to the problems that have started occurring near St. Paul's skyway-street connection at Central Station once it was built. I merely pointed to this street connection as a mini case-study of what has been happening in Saint Paul once they built their skyway-street connection, and why building owners in Minneapolis may not be too keen on building them after what has been occurring "across the river".

Calling people one doesn't know "racist" who are justifiably nervous walking through that portion of skyway due to assaults and harassment people face there is a great way to deflect the real issue of the documented anti-social behaviors occurring in that skyway. I've never been threatened and at 6'1" I am generally left alone, but I can attest to the fact that it is the least pleasant skyway of the entire system. I can understand why women, in particular, may not feel safe walking through that section alone.

The strawman was crying "racism" in regards to the problems that have started occurring near St. Paul's skyway-street connection at Central Station once it was built.

Except that's not at all what happened. Instead, you responded to post from November 16 about what could be done to improve the Minneapolis skyway system that referenced the long history of "business" opposition to better street connections, which indeed is grounded in racist concerns about letting the wrong people in, to tell us how it isn't really racist.